What the current administration has done for the military and veterans

[Antitrust32]

you are the queen of copying and pasting full length articles with no sources!

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

England's (yea Riot I know it's not all of England) take on Obama and the military

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/ni...-presidential/

do you really have a big problem with Obama playing golf?

I have absolutely no issues with the President golfing once a week during the warmer months.

just for disclosure, I also played 18 holes on Memorial Day & I still have tons of respect for our fallen hero's.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

you are the queen of copying and pasting full length articles with no sources!

Which things I said Obama did for the military are false?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

Which things I said Obama did for the military are false?

I didnt say anything is false & I am very happy that the "stop-loss" policy in particular was ended.


I was laughing at your source, "the news".

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

I didnt say anything is false & I am very happy that the "stop-loss" policy in particular was ended.


I was laughing at your source, "the news".

I referenced that entire list in the last 10 minutes. From "the news".

I figure most who watch "the news" or pay attention to politics regularly would have seen some fleeting reference to all those things in the past two years.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

you are the queen of copying and pasting full length articles with no sources!

That's not true, looking back at the posts I make (which I just did). It's rare and infrequent that I don't reference a source with the direct link, and blue box quotes.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

That's not true, looking back at the posts I make (which I just did). It's rare and infrequent that I don't reference a source with the direct link, and blue box quotes.

Just put huffingtonpost.com in your signature and you're good to go.

[dellinger63]

Obama doing his Kramer act. Now that's patriotism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmHtG...eature=related

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Just put huffingtonpost.com in your signature and you're good to go.

You have to admit that you having issues with where a quote or content comes from is pretty classic. I think Somer pointed out somewherre else, but that one rag that you had the child abuse article from was a doozey

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by GBBob

You have to admit that you having issues with where a quote or content comes from is pretty classic. I think Somer pointed out somewherre else, but that one rag that you had the child abuse article from was a doozey

I was just trying to help her out. Better than 50-50 odds her original post came from my suggestion.

BTW that same doozy source provided video and photoraphic evidence, something Huffy rarely does.

[somerfrost]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I was just trying to help her out. Better than 50-50 odds her original post came from my suggestion.

BTW that same doozy source provided video and photoraphic evidence, something Huffy rarely does.

And I said it may well be true (probably is) but the issue was the far right nature of the site...hey, you can quote any site you choose but seems a bit inconsistent when you then turn around and be critical of Riot's sources. Right wing folks tend to follow right wing sites and liberals tend to read liberal sites...me I will read anything but am duly wary of all, as I've said many times my politics are far left so I have fewer choices.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by somerfrost

And I said it may well be true (probably is) but the issue was the far right nature of the site...hey, you can quote any site you choose but seems a bit inconsistent when you then turn around and be critical of Riot's sources. Right wing folks tend to follow right wing sites and liberals tend to read liberal sites...me I will read anything but am duly wary of all, as I've said many times my politics are far left so I have fewer choices.

I believe this goes back to Riot's fictitious chart. When what is presented is proven false then obviously the source has to be questioned. We all know Huffy is left and Drudge is right only Huff links to op-ed pieces far more often than Drudge does.

What I question is why the left sites ignore the constant human rights violations to mainly women and children, including in this country and instead take the position Repubs are anti-women because they want Planned Parenthood defunded? Repubs also want PBS defunded so I guess they're also against television.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

What I question is why the left sites ignore the constant human rights violations to mainly women and children, including in this country and instead take the position Repubs are anti-women because they want Planned Parenthood defunded? Repubs also want PBS defunded so I guess they're also against television.

we need more abortions and birth control in this country, not less.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

we need more abortions and birth control in this country, not less.

Oh I agree but it's far from being anti-women. Denying a female the right to get an abortion would be anti-woman and I conceed a minority of the Rep party would like to see that but thankfully it will never happen.

BTW Beating women for driving? Now that is anti-women.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Oh I agree but it's far from being anti-women. Denying a female the right to get an abortion would be anti-woman and I conceed a minority of the Rep party would like to see that but thankfully it will never happen.

BTW Beating women for driving? Now that is anti-women.

it's an anti-human culture over there.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

it's an anti-human culture over there.

And we are partly to blame for supporting and legitimatising them. Especially when the President of the U.S. gives speeches on their great culture, music and inventions (most of which are lies) yet has no understanding of how these animals treat their women and children.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I was just trying to help her out. Better than 50-50 odds her original post came from my suggestion.

BTW that same doozy source provided video and photoraphic evidence, something Huffy rarely does.

No. But you hold onto your little delusions. It's cute

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

I believe this goes back to Riot's fictitious chart. When what is presented is proven false then obviously the source has to be questioned.

First, let's get straight that that chart is not false, and you're saying so doesn't make it so. It's accurate, it's been peer-reviewed by far more trained economists than you, and it's been perfectly accepted as accurate in public use.

In fact, I posted the referenced original source, several times, asked you what part of their data was wrong, and you couldn't say a thing about it. You couldn't address it. You changed the subject.

So your continuous little dance about "proven false" is ridiculous, Dell. Nobody is buying it. Nobody ever "proved anything false" about that chart. You couldn't even apparently understand the figures that went into making it when I posted the references.

You think that saying something over and over makes it so. Nonsense.

There are tons of aggregator sites, like Huffington Post. Posting an AP article that is the exact same on HuffPost, Drudge, Daily Beast doesn't matter if it's an AP article. You dismiss stuff if it's at an aggregator site you don't personally like, but the aggregator has nothing to do with who wrote the article. It's the writer that matters, the validity of the source. Not where it's published. A well-respected financial organization created that chart, not Huffington Post. And you know that.

Editorials are different, obviously. Different editorial writers certainly have different political views that color their opinions.

You are well known for posting editorial opinions as "fact" to back up your arguments, btw.

So your constant mocking of one aggregator website - which isn't even one of the true "left" sites is silly, and shows your general ignorance of internet media (try Firedoglake or Daily Kos if you want a real "left" site). And the aggregator stories all have to be referenced back to the original writer - not the site, if their authors didn't write an editorial.